Personal tools

Argument: 2010 US elections show why transparent campaign ads needed

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

"Editorial: Public has right to know who is funding campaign ads." Grand Rapids Press Editorial. August 24, 2010: "if the August primary is any indication, the Nov. 2 general will provide plenty of evidence of why a legal overhaul is badly needed. Almost 40 percent, or $4 million, of the money spent in the gubernatorial primary on television advertising skirted hard disclosure rules applied to other campaign spending, according to figures collected by the Michigan Campaign Finance Network. The $4 million came from groups running “issue ads.” The ads do not rely on court-defined magic words such as “vote for” or “vote against.” Because of that omission, they don’t make the detailed donor reports required of campaign committees."

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits